> It's shallow comfort for a parent to rest in believing he'll see his child
> again. (whether it's true or not)
> His comfort must be totally in Christ, and the trial of losing a child is
an
> exercise in stretching his faith to that end.


[Chris] Okay, folks, I am ending my part in the discussion here. I am simply
tired of seeing the motives for my beliefs impugned. I am amazed that many
of my brethren are insinuating that I, and brethren such as myself
(including Spurgeon) who believe we can extend biblical comfort to those
Christian parents mourning the loss of an infant by reminding them of the
promises given by the inspired Apostle Paul in 1 Thes.4:13-18, are merely
offering shallow comfort, even though we are biblically convinced in infant
salvation (even if you disagree with our conclusions). Most of you making
these passionate protests, with few exceptions, are agnostics over the issue
any way, which means in the long run, when all is said and done, WE MIGHT BE
*RIGHT*!!! I cannot help but believe that much of this sentiment stems from
an arrogant form of Hyper-Calvinistic piety, that insists that if anyone
seeks comfort in ANYTHING else, other than Christ being in Sovereign control
over all events, he or she is a shallow Christian. If this was true, then
Paul would never have offered his words of comfort even to those mourning
the loss of adult Christian loved ones in 1 Thes.4:13-18. Otherwise, he
would have merely said, "Do not concern yourself, brothers, about those who
have fallen asleep, because knowing they are at peace with the Savior for
all eternity is not where you are to receive comfort. That's God's business,
so just mind your own business. Just trust in the fact that God will do what
is right in regard to their eternal destiny. If you concern yourself about
anything less than the Person of Christ you are being shallow and
man-centered." But our tender and compassionate God did not say that in His
Word. Obviously the Person of Christ must be our chief focus in EVERY area
of thought, and the main source of our comfort in any trial, but *HE*
offered additional (not superior or even equal) comfort. *HE* is the one who
inspired Paul to remind us about departed Christian loved ones rising again
and returning with Him as a powerful source of comfort. It is one thing to
disagree with my conclusions that infants who die will not be tormented in
hell. It is entirely another thing to insinuate that my belief in offering
comfort to mourners who grieve the loss of an infant with SCRIPTURAL
promises is shallow. As I have repeated many times, I am not merely driven
by mushy-gushy Hallmark Card sentiment to draw my conclusions. I just have
not as of yet been biblically convinced that infants will be tormented in
hell for the very same reasons I have not as of yet been biblically
convinced that they are proper candidates for baptism. Just as the
Scriptures teach who the proper candidates for baptism are, and why, when
and how they are to be baptized, they also teach who those who are tormented
in hell are, and why they are being tormented (for their deeds). I see no
infants mentioned in either category.